Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Data Surveillance

143 replies to this topic
UtricularEwe001
  • UtricularEwe001

    I am a Pirate

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2012
  • None

#1

Posted 07 June 2013 - 11:43 AM Edited by UtricularEwe001, 07 June 2013 - 11:55 AM.

QUOTE
The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.

The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries.

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

Under the terms of the blanket order, the numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls. The contents of the conversation itself are not covered.


http://www.guardian....zon-court-order

QUOTE (CNN)
Even so, reports in two newspapers this week claim that intelligence agencies have collected vast amounts of user data from U.S. phone provider Verizon and Internet technology companies, including Microsoft, Apple, Google, Yahoo and Facebook.


http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_t2

EDIT 1 : Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying

After reading this news, all i can think is of "The Machine" From Person Of Interest. They actually built it.

What do you guys think about it? Do you support it or against the surveillance?

Sorry if a thread was already made smile.gif

Raavi
  • Raavi

    Allergic to bullsh*t

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2012
  • Vatican-City

#2

Posted 07 June 2013 - 11:47 AM Edited by Raavi, 07 June 2013 - 01:01 PM.

I'm surprised this isn't made by baguvix_wanrltw.

OT: Talking about a waste of time and money. There is nothing interesting in 99.9% of the phone conversations in the world. Not to mention that this is a gross violation of the fourth amendment.

lil weasel
  • lil weasel

    Shoot Looters, Hang Pirates!

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2006

#3

Posted 07 June 2013 - 11:49 AM

Well... it kind of makes the idea that 'honest' people have nothing to fear smile.gif
Next (think Boston) the police should be able to search without warrants, so they can protect the 'honest' people from the 'bad' people. icon14.gif
Then there is the need to compel people to testify. 'Honest' people shouldn't be afraid of the 'truth' and 'bad' people shouldn't be allowed to hide from their actions. sad.gif

So it looks like we should start learning how to eat boiled frog legs.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#4

Posted 07 June 2013 - 12:00 PM

Interesting to see what people report as "user data" these days.

IP and MAC addresses, IMEI and subscriber numbers, etc etc aren't user data. They aren't protected by any kind of privacy restrictions and collecting them does not violate the fourth amendment. In most cases they aren't even legally the property of the user but actually belong to the service provider. If the NSA were slurping up communication content without a warrant, that would be a gross infringement of civil liberties. But the metadata is Verizon's to give, isnt protected by privacy legislation and doesn't violate the fourth amendment.

As a general rule of thumb, metadata isn't considered private.

Raavi
  • Raavi

    Allergic to bullsh*t

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2012
  • Vatican-City

#5

Posted 07 June 2013 - 01:13 PM Edited by Raavi, 07 June 2013 - 01:22 PM.

QUOTE
'The numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls'


Ridiculous, there is no warrant, probably cause, nor suspicion. This sounds like something right out of Berlin Wall- East Germany.

This data can and will be used to prosecute (and or 'threaten') people the government doesn't like, wether it's those pesky reporters, or a little bit too avid of a protestor, hell even the person that asks too difficult questions can face the full weight of the US 'Justice' department. Which is devastating. Sounds like a dystopian movie, but it's reality now.

Not to mention I can't imagine that they are only collecting Verizon's data. That's just bullsh*t.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#6

Posted 07 June 2013 - 01:25 PM Edited by sivispacem, 07 June 2013 - 02:34 PM.

QUOTE (Raavi @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 14:13)
QUOTE
'The numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls'


Ridiculous, there is no warrant, probably cause, nor suspicion. This sounds like something right out of Berlin Wall- East Germany.

You only need a warrant or probable cause for personal possessions or infornation. The identifying characteristics of a telephone conversation aren't private or the possession of the caller. It's basically like claiming the publicly visible registration plate or VIN number on a car is the property of the registered keeper- it clearly isn't. The data actually belongs to the service provider to do whatever they wish with. At the same time, service providers like Google can basically do whatever they want with the data you give them as by giving it to them you no longer own it. It's all in the T&C you never bother to read.

EDIT
Now, what you really need to be concerned about is PRISM. This effectively allows unlimited access to content transmitted or stored by the likes of Facebook, Google and Microsoft whenever they want based purely on the metric that there is a 51% ot higher chance of them being foreign communications. How is this legal when it clearly also catches out US citizens? Simple. You agreed to this surveillance when you gave these companies Carte Blanche to do whatever they want with your data by signing their terms and conditions. The data isn't yours anymore so you have no fourth amendment privileges concerning it.

I<3GTAV
  • I<3GTAV

    Nate is Love, Nate is Life

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2012
  • United-States

#7

Posted 07 June 2013 - 05:34 PM

They've already done a million things to prevent terrorism, this is going a little too far.

The Yokel
  • The Yokel

    Boob groper

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica

#8

Posted 07 June 2013 - 06:44 PM

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 14:25)
How is this legal when it clearly also catches out US citizens? Simple. You agreed to this surveillance when you gave these companies Carte Blanche to do whatever they want with your data by signing their terms and conditions. The data isn't yours anymore so you have no fourth amendment privileges concerning it.

But it can't be legal if those terms and conditions are clearly unconstitutional. They get away with it because people don't care enough to bring that issue to the court. But the corporations don't have the right to enforce a policy that disregards The Constitution and federal laws.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#9

Posted 07 June 2013 - 06:55 PM

QUOTE (GTAvanja @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 19:44)
QUOTE (sivispacem @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 14:25)
How is this legal when it clearly also catches out US citizens? Simple. You agreed to this surveillance when you gave these companies Carte Blanche to do whatever they want with your data by signing their terms and conditions. The data isn't yours anymore so you have no fourth amendment privileges concerning it.

But it can't be legal if those terms and conditions are clearly unconstitutional. They get away with it because people don't care enough to bring that issue to the court. But the corporations don't have the right to enforce a policy that disregards The Constitution and federal laws.

Ahh, that's a separate issue. The question arises of whether terms and conditions saying "all data that users enter into our system becomes our property" can be enforced. In Europe, they cannot unless they are clearly and specifically highlighted, because of EU privacy laws. In the US, I'm not so sure. Various utterly absurd legal clauses in huge documents, in some cases longer than an entire Shakespeare script, have been tried in courts and those courts almost universally find on the side of the corporation trying to enforce them. Case in point, the utter insanity surrounding US financial contract litigation. Or the horrendously broken US patent licensing system that serves as an embarrassment to the entire US technology industry; where companies fight their PR battles on the courtroom floor, and patent trolls can level million-dollar piracy suits against John Does based on pirated material those very same trolls placed in the public domain; identifying litigation targets with nothing more than an IP address.

I in no way condone this activity but the sad fact of the matter is that the US personal legal system is biased against the citizens. They can hand their constitutional rights in at the door by ticking box at the end of a 50,000 word internet document filled with completely impenetrable jargon. Organisations like the NSA aren't infringing the constitutional rights of citizens by obtaining this data; but the providers are infringing the civil and human rights of their customers by extending their legal reach over personal information effectively indefinitely. It's a side product of the lack of centralised political oversight and the separation of powers, unfortunately.

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#10

Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:13 PM

No. And you are so stuck up in the #1 most corrupted government's ass that you believe whatever they say. This is violating the fourth amendment as Raavi stated. Facebook is one of the most corrupted sites on the internet. They basically claim that your information is kept safe, but in reality they are sending to other third parties without your consent. The worst idea America's government have come up with. Tbh, this might come as a shock but i wouldn't even be surprised if there was some kind of attack on the government.

Tchuck
  • Tchuck

    Grey Gaming

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2002
  • Japan

#11

Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:42 PM

QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 11:13)
They basically claim that your information is kept safe, but in reality they are sending to other third parties without your consent.

Except you consented to it by signing their terms and conditions. Like sivis said, it's a whole separate issue.

baguvix_wanrltw
  • baguvix_wanrltw

    Cynical, yeah. Bitter, probably.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2012

#12

Posted 07 June 2013 - 07:55 PM

QUOTE (Raavi @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 11:47)
I'm surprised this isn't made by baguvix_wanrltw.

I would've but I had stuff to do! I do unfortunately have a life outside this forum, though the best parts of my life clearly come from here tounge.gif

But I can see you guys did just fine without me. More "conspiracy theories" coming true. This is number... 860 this year? Yeah. Tinfoil hat and everything...


The worst thing - in the sense that it harms the most people - about this sh*t is that it makes you think twice about what you say. There used to be a time on this planet where you could talk to your girl and tell her whatever you felt like, nowadays you have to be very very careful not to say anything that any law enforcement agency on the whole f*cking planet might ever want to use against you because it's all saved and shared with other police states.

Pretty damn sad if you ask me.

(btw, talking about actual data here/PRISM, ECHELON etc, not metadata... though that'd still be illegal in most countries, and rightly so)

Happyness
  • Happyness

    Li'l G Loc

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2013

#13

Posted 07 June 2013 - 08:12 PM

And they say I am the idiot with the tinfoil hat.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#14

Posted 07 June 2013 - 09:00 PM

QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 20:13)
No. And you are so stuck up in the #1 most corrupted government's ass that you believe whatever they say. This is violating the fourth amendment as Raavi stated. Facebook is one of the most corrupted sites on the internet. They basically claim that your information is kept safe, but in reality they are sending to other third parties without your consent. The worst idea America's government have come up with. Tbh, this might come as a shock but i wouldn't even be surprised if there was some kind of attack on the government.

You really think the US government is the most corrupt in the world? Really? Not, say, Russia which loses 20% of its annual GDP to corruption? Not some theocratic or autocratic hell hole? That seems pretty delusional to me. No, the sad fact is that the NSA legally couldn't access this veritable treasure trove of personal and private information without the data holders having a legal entitlement to it. Did you not read the bit of the Facebook T&C where they said that all content provided by users legally belongs to them? Or the bit in the Skype contract that permits them to store and transmit any communication data they wish without the permission of users? The NSA are merely taking advantage of the wealth of data corporations legally own regarding their users. It isn't unconstitutional. Morally questionable yes. But it adheres to the letter, if not the spirit, of the law.

Irviding
  • Irviding

    No bed crew

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2008
  • United-States

#15

Posted 07 June 2013 - 09:21 PM

I think it's important to note that actual call data and email text are not actually being stored in NSA databases. It's just the numbers/addresses/etc. If I were to call a phone number that's on a list for being related to terrorist activity, then the system would trigger my phone number and probably a warrant would be obtained to listen in on the conversation/look into me. This isn't some carte blanche to listen to your phone and email conversations.

As for whether or not this violates civil liberties, it doesn't. These companies own your call data and email data - not you. If I send an email to sivis, there are more than just two parties that have access to that email without jumping through legal hoops - and those extra parties aren't the NSA. They're ISPs/email providers.

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#16

Posted 07 June 2013 - 09:27 PM

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 21:00)
QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 20:13)
No. And you are so stuck up in the #1 most corrupted government's ass that you believe whatever they say. This is violating the fourth amendment as Raavi stated. Facebook is one of the most corrupted sites on the internet. They basically claim that your information is kept safe, but in reality they are sending to other third parties without your consent. The worst idea America's government have come up with. Tbh, this might come as a shock but i wouldn't even be surprised if there was some kind of attack on the government.

You really think the US government is the most corrupt in the world? Really? Not, say, Russia which loses 20% of its annual GDP to corruption? Not some theocratic or autocratic hell hole? That seems pretty delusional to me. No, the sad fact is that the NSA legally couldn't access this veritable treasure trove of personal and private information without the data holders having a legal entitlement to it. Did you not read the bit of the Facebook T&C where they said that all content provided by users legally belongs to them? Or the bit in the Skype contract that permits them to store and transmit any communication data they wish without the permission of users? The NSA are merely taking advantage of the wealth of data corporations legally own regarding their users. It isn't unconstitutional. Morally questionable yes. But it adheres to the letter, if not the spirit, of the law.

I just realised the T&C. I think i am the biggest idiot in this world, my bad. But yes, i do think they are the most corrupt government in the world but also all governments are like that.

baguvix_wanrltw
  • baguvix_wanrltw

    Cynical, yeah. Bitter, probably.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2012

#17

Posted 07 June 2013 - 09:29 PM

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 21:00)
But it adheres to the letter, if not the spirit,  of the law.

For americans perhaps. But the Internet (Google, Facebook etc) is a worldwide thing, which means that the US govt imposes its laws (which are VERY MUCH in conflict with laws in more civilized regions of the world as you noted yourself) on the whole world. And that's when it becomes problematic again. Not that anyone didn't know this was happening but it's time to ride on the wave of outrage that will hopefully follow these "revelations" and stop (or at least publicize and shame) sh*t like this.

And that's completely ignoring the fact that the NSA does the same sh*t to US citizens even though it is NOT allowed to do that by law; they simply exploit a hole to declare "if our software says you're 51% likely to be foreign you lost your constitutional rights. So f*ck you!".

Irviding: I assume you're only addressing the OP which hasn't mentioned PRISM but that's what the conversation here was mostly about, just FYI.

Also this (=the stuff in the OP) is not about data being collected only about terrorists or those in contact with them and you should be aware of that. It's about EVERYBODY's metadata. They explicitly said that when they said they were looking into the Boston Marathon bombing data, which they would not have because they weren't watching them - UNLESS they have the (meta)data of everyone.

And PRISM just extends on that. FAR beyond.

http://gizmodo.com/w...prism-511875267
http://www.washingto...tion-documents/
http://www.huffingto..._n_3402883.html
http://www.thenation...net-spy-program

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#18

Posted 07 June 2013 - 09:59 PM

QUOTE (baguvix_wanrltw @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 22:29)
QUOTE (sivispacem @ Friday, Jun 7 2013, 21:00)
But it adheres to the letter, if not the spirit,  of the law.

For americans perhaps. But the Internet (Google, Facebook etc) is a worldwide thing, which means that the US govt imposes its laws (which are VERY MUCH in conflict with laws in more civilized regions of the world as you noted yourself) on the whole world.

This is a problem with the idea of law and the internet, though. The issue is that, according to US law, the data of organisations centred in the US, whose data storage facilities are in the US, can be subject to this kind of interrogation. We also have to acknowledge that, despite the internet being a decentralised global commodity, it is in effect actually an American-run, American-derived, and US-centred service. The IANA and ICANN are both US organisations, US centred and with a heavy debt to the USDoD. As much as the rest of the world may not like it, we somewhat have to play by America's rules when it comes to global networking infrastructure- because when push comes to shove it's all basically operated from the US. In once sense, it's the US' fault for imposing domestic terms and conditions on global internet users. But on the other hand, we're talking people making voluntary decisions to involve themselves in these services and consign to these terms and conditions. The question of how informed they are when they make these decisions is important, but nonetheless one must accept that individuals take responsibility for both their actions and at least a large proportion of how informed they are.

lil weasel
  • lil weasel

    Shoot Looters, Hang Pirates!

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2006

#19

Posted 07 June 2013 - 10:40 PM Edited by lil weasel, 07 June 2013 - 11:16 PM.

It's interesting that in many states it is unlawful to record a telephone call without the permission of all parties involved. In some states it is unlawful to record video of police in public without permission of all parties involved.
It is unlawful to lie to police.

Yet... to protect the public the people in government can do all those things any where smile.gif

And... the public is protected by paper laws enforced by the same people in government. Prime examples, 'Orders of Protection', and Hoover's secret investigation records.

user posted image
People in Government can do what ever they want when ever they want. The whole business about warrants and probable cause is relevant ONLY when they are caught.
No crime has been committed until someone else knows about it.
With Homeland Security and such with secret trials, secret imprisonment, etc. who is going to find out? And if someone does what are the repercussions when the Government investigates themselves. Instead of dealing with the Blue Wall, we now have the Black(suit) Wall.
When the Executive Branch also controls the Judicial Branch -- guess what? Who needs the Legislature? Remember those Executive Orders, a Tyrant can make his own laws by Hooverism...

κενιη
  • κενιη

    Bringer of Dramageddon

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2010

#20

Posted 08 June 2013 - 05:59 AM

I could debate the legalities of what the NSA is doing and agree with the fact that a lot of the sh*t they are doing is legal (agreeing with EULA agreements and whatnot) but that still does not make it right. The gov't may have found a legal loophole to spy on the citizens that it is supposed to represent but that does not give it permission to do so. Its wrong and Obama once voiced his opinion against it back in 2007:



And somehow e found ourselves here:



Did you get all that? Here is a summary I stole from Gizmodo to spare myself the typing:

"Every member of Congress has been briefed on this program."

"What you've got is two programs that were originally authorized by Congress and repeatedly authorized by Congress."

"These are programs that have been authorized by broad bipartisan majorities repeatedly since 2006."

"You can't have 100-percent security and then have 100-percent privacy."

"I don't welcome leaks, there's a reason these programs are classified."

"There are some tradeoffs involved."

"Modest encroachments on privacy."

"Your duly elected representatives have been consistently informed on exactly what we're doing."

Its bullsh*t and the government is giving the shaft to its citizens be it legal or not.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#21

Posted 08 June 2013 - 06:38 AM

There's not been a great deal of clarity about the utilisation of these powers. I can see the security value of having access to this data and why the NSA want to maintain the free access capability to data legally held and owned by technology and online service providers, but I question quite how valuable drawing down this data en masse would be from an intelligence point of view. None of the articles I've seen actually address this question.

I agree that the whole thing is really morally questionable but I lay the blame squarely at the feet of the organisations who effectively extort the information silently and without proper prior consent from users. Thinking that the NSA might have access to it would be the least of my worries given how financially valuable PII is to all sorts of shady and criminal organisations.

Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Triple Vacuum Seal

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2011

#22

Posted 08 June 2013 - 06:40 AM

This is most likely just a result of Verizon's stubborn history in terms of releasing customer data. As a Verizon customer, I remember reading various legal forums trying to retrieve my deleted text messages. Most of the attorneys kept going on about how Verizon is generally one of the least cooperative telecommunications providers when it comes to giving their data up to anyone. I would've needed a subpoena just to get my own deleted text messages. I still hate Verizon though. They reeled everyone in with their unlimited everything plan and then got rid of the plan option while keeping the rates high as hell. f*ckin' shysters.


What do I think about this? It doesn't matter because the government does what ever the hell they want to anyway. Luckily, I haven't done any phone-based torrenting in a while so they can have my data. lol.gif

κενιη
  • κενιη

    Bringer of Dramageddon

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2010

#23

Posted 08 June 2013 - 06:51 AM

I like what was said by a Gizmodo writer in response to another writers article titled: Why I Just Don't Give a sh*t About PRISM (Or Any Other Spying):


QUOTE (Jesus Diaz)
This has to be the most stupid, most selfish post ever written in the history of Gizmodo, and that includes my own very supid ones.

A post clearly written by a twentysomething who needs to read more history books. Who needs to be aware of what really is at stake here. Who needs to see beyond his bellybutton and his Xbox.

Yes, Kyle, the world doesn't give a sh*t about you and your antics*. Or mine. We are, most of us, irrelevant at an individual level. Until we are not. Until someone decides to use whatever information they have available to do something against someone. Individually or as a collective.

Kevin Drum wrote this in Motherjones today:

QUOTE
At the same time, maybe we should still be surprised to hear Obama say something like this: "But I know that the people who are involved in these programs... They're professionals. In the abstract you can complain about Big Brother and how this is a program run amok, but when you actually look at the details, I think we've struck the right balance."

Sure. And it's possible, even likely, that these professionals aren't abusing the data they've collected. Yet. But does Obama really think that a government that collects this kind of stuff won't abuse it eventually? That's vanishingly unlikely.


One example of what Kevin says: there was nothing wrong with Germany computerized census of 1933—made with the first IBM perforated card machines—until the Nazis got to power and started to create lists of jews complete with address in a matter of minutes. UNCHECKED access to big data is what enabled the Holocaust.

Millions of people—literally about 70 million—died in the war that followed, fought to save and preserve the rights that you so easily disregard in this article because, as you argue, nobody gives a sh*t about you. You have nothing to hide.

But, in reality, some people give and will give a sh*t about you. Not about the porn you watch, but about who you are, what your spending habits are, and a million other things. And that people can be a government or can be someone who reads Gizmodo, some imbecile who hates you for whatever reason and works at the NSA, happens to have access to your information and can use it to do something.

Have no doubt: if the information is there, it can be used for less noble purposes than "fighting terrorism". Whatever that means. I didn't see PRISM stopping the Boston bombings, for example.

If you can't see WHY you should care about this situation, then I will not be sorry if something happens to you or anyone you love when, in the future, the world ends up in a similar situation than in 1939. Hopefully, that will not happen. But, if history has told us something, is that is HAS happened. Many times. And it will probably happen again. And I'm not talking about Nazis coming back, but governments and corporations getting ideas about how to use Big Data unchecked.

That's why you should care.

Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Triple Vacuum Seal

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2011

#24

Posted 08 June 2013 - 07:01 AM

QUOTE (κενιη @ Saturday, Jun 8 2013, 01:51)
I like what was said by a Gizmodo writer in response to another writers article titled: Why I Just Don't Give a sh*t About PRISM (Or Any Other Spying):


QUOTE (Jesus Diaz)
This has to be the most stupid, most selfish post ever written in the history of Gizmodo, and that includes my own very supid ones.

A post clearly written by a twentysomething who needs to read more history books. Who needs to be aware of what really is at stake here. Who needs to see beyond his bellybutton and his Xbox.

Yes, Kyle, the world doesn't give a sh*t about you and your antics*. Or mine. We are, most of us, irrelevant at an individual level. Until we are not. Until someone decides to use whatever information they have available to do something against someone. Individually or as a collective.

Kevin Drum wrote this in Motherjones today:

QUOTE
At the same time, maybe we should still be surprised to hear Obama say something like this: "But I know that the people who are involved in these programs... They're professionals. In the abstract you can complain about Big Brother and how this is a program run amok, but when you actually look at the details, I think we've struck the right balance."

Sure. And it's possible, even likely, that these professionals aren't abusing the data they've collected. Yet. But does Obama really think that a government that collects this kind of stuff won't abuse it eventually? That's vanishingly unlikely.


One example of what Kevin says: there was nothing wrong with Germany computerized census of 1933—made with the first IBM perforated card machines—until the Nazis got to power and started to create lists of jews complete with address in a matter of minutes. UNCHECKED access to big data is what enabled the Holocaust.

Millions of people—literally about 70 million—died in the war that followed, fought to save and preserve the rights that you so easily disregard in this article because, as you argue, nobody gives a sh*t about you. You have nothing to hide.

But, in reality, some people give and will give a sh*t about you. Not about the porn you watch, but about who you are, what your spending habits are, and a million other things. And that people can be a government or can be someone who reads Gizmodo, some imbecile who hates you for whatever reason and works at the NSA, happens to have access to your information and can use it to do something.

Have no doubt: if the information is there, it can be used for less noble purposes than "fighting terrorism". Whatever that means. I didn't see PRISM stopping the Boston bombings, for example.

If you can't see WHY you should care about this situation, then I will not be sorry if something happens to you or anyone you love when, in the future, the world ends up in a similar situation than in 1939. Hopefully, that will not happen. But, if history has told us something, is that is HAS happened. Many times. And it will probably happen again. And I'm not talking about Nazis coming back, but governments and corporations getting ideas about how to use Big Data unchecked.

That's why you should care.

Good post indeed. Our power lies with the vote and the dollar for now, but even then there is nothing we can really do about this but get stressed. I find it appalling that the government can literally do what ever the hell they want to do if they say, "no wait...we're fighting terrorists". It's almost patronizing at a certain point. Here we are a few mass shootings and bombings down the road, and our government is still trying to convince itself that terrorism can be cured. It's like ridding the nation of purse snatchings.


I won't be shocked in the least bit if some people's data ends up being sold on the black market.

Raavi
  • Raavi

    Allergic to bullsh*t

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2012
  • Vatican-City

#25

Posted 08 June 2013 - 12:48 PM

PRISM, is madness. As a citizen of the EU, I optate the following to happen; the President of the European Council to put the US Government on notice that they have 24 hours to cease and desist spy activities on EU citizens. And that failure to comply, will result in a motion to dissolve NATO, end all diplomatic links with the USA and end all bilateral links with the USA including all extradition agreements. Further more, the military forces of al EU countries are to disengage with immediate effect from all military engagements that are in partnership with US Forces.

The funny thing is that they're still surprised they're one of, if not the most hated country (governments), on earth.

Happyness
  • Happyness

    Li'l G Loc

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2013

#26

Posted 08 June 2013 - 01:19 PM

Who gives them the right to spy on us Europeans? They think they can own the world, pfft.

The Yokel
  • The Yokel

    Boob groper

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica

#27

Posted 08 June 2013 - 02:57 PM

QUOTE (Raavi @ Saturday, Jun 8 2013, 13:48)
PRISM, is madness. As a citizen of the EU, I optate the following to happen; the President of the European Council to put the US Government on notice that they have 24 hours to cease and desist spy activities on EU citizens. And that failure to comply, will result in a motion to dissolve NATO, end all diplomatic links with the USA and end all bilateral links with the USA including all extradition agreements. Further more, the military forces of al EU countries are to disengage with immediate effect from all military engagements that are in partnership with US Forces.

The funny thing is that they're still surprised they're one of, if not the most hated country (governments), on earth.

Agreed. It's despicable to spy on allies.

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Hellhound Warpig

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#28

Posted 08 June 2013 - 03:27 PM

QUOTE (Happyness @ Saturday, Jun 8 2013, 14:19)
Who gives them the right to spy on us Europeans?

According to US laws surrounding this, any data that's held on US servers by companies based in the US is American. It would be hard for us to legally challenge the NSA's use of the data because we don't have any say over it according to US law; put simply, it doesn't actually belong to us because it's held by a US company in a US server, and is usually their property. What we all can do is put pressure on organisations who a) claim ownership over user data, b) don't adjust terms and conditions to meet local laws, c) infringe EU rights by trying to claim unenforceable legal clauses in their contract, and d) fail to store information in nations with suitable data privacy protection. Or, y'know, don't use any of these services for anything you wouldn't be happy with someone else reading. Use Hushmail for email service, don't social network or if you do don't put any PII up.

Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Triple Vacuum Seal

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2011

#29

Posted 08 June 2013 - 06:50 PM Edited by canttakemyid, 08 June 2013 - 06:56 PM.

QUOTE (Raavi @ Saturday, Jun 8 2013, 07:48)
PRISM, is madness. As a citizen of the EU, I optate the following to happen; the President of the European Council to put the US Government on notice that they have 24 hours to cease and desist spy activities on EU citizens. And that failure to comply, will result in a motion to dissolve NATO, end all diplomatic links with the USA and end all bilateral links with the USA including all extradition agreements. Further more, the military forces of al EU countries are to disengage with immediate effect from all military engagements that are in partnership with US Forces.

The funny thing is that they're still surprised they're one of, if not the most hated country (governments), on earth.

The last time I checked, it was in the EU's best interest to uphold the NATO alliance more so than the US given that the US pretty much carries the alliance both financially and militarily. As the largest military force in NATO, the US is politically held the most accountable for NATO's actions too. The NATO alliance is a burden to the US and its taxpayers. This spying is ridiculous, but realistically, diplomatic links between the western powers are far too strong to end over some surveillance program that has been going on for 6 years. Especially when the program uses data from US-based servers owned by US-based companies.

Furthermore, this is a top secret program that was leaked. Keep in mind the similar types of intelligence activities in the various EU nations that haven't been leaked.

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#30

Posted 08 June 2013 - 09:32 PM

This is not going to end well for Obama and the government. America are screwed with that government.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users